-2

The following is an outline of our current organization (or pecking order) and brief description of their roles

  • Solutions Manager (Visionary "Build this web-based solution that can do A,B and C")
  • Software Engineering Director (Over departmental PM's to manage resources, spend capex wisely..point finger, drive deliverables..go on golfing, and skiing trips without notice)
  • Lead Architect (Me, outlines, and established architectual and code base for solution from end to end, including hardware, software planning to get it done within budget. Coaches and drives development team to build product under an SOA, sprint dev environment. Write code, but mostly communicates with SM's to ensure vision and/or requirements are being fulfilled..etc..etc)
  • Middleware Developers (Engineers responsible for SQL adminstration, and coding middleware REST architecture)
  • Frontend Developers (Engineers responsible for developing, coding and deploying Web Portal)
  • IT Admin (Engineer responsible for hardware acquisition, security standards, co-location move.

I am the Lead Architect responsible for ensuring that what the Solutions Managers want is delivered. My delimna is the Project Manager somehow promotes a questionable frontend developer to a Lead. The now new de-fact Lead Frontend Architect relishes the title and no-longer believes he/she has to stay in synch with me much less follow standard development protocols. A rift is caused. To compound the issue the Project Manager (sympathetic to the less than productive Front-end Lead Architect) dissects the project and shelves critical components for a much future date until he or she can catch up.

Here's the kicker: The solutions managers and customers are not happy, and look to me for answers. They want to know why some of the features they've requested were shelved. Meanwhile the Engineering Director has no clue of the ramifications of this impending train wreck. No matter how I explain that 2 kings do not a good product make, the status quo seems to be getting worse. I don't have the authority to deal with the matter in a more direct and conventional matter. Lots of voice, and very little people with back-bone to follow up.

  • What is wrong with this picture?
  • What steps can I take to remedy this (if it is even possible at this point)?
Vadim Kotov
  • 8,084
  • 8
  • 48
  • 62
Nanohurtz
  • 89
  • 1
  • 4
  • 9

1 Answers1

0

What's wrong? To be honest, your job is to come up with it, and his job is to make it and in reality it's leads job to cope with you. You should simply finish architecture and clearly state that your job is done. If PM has any touch with reality left, He will put pressure from you onto lead. Flowchart of "doing the job" flows from hierarchicly highest to lowest, what I want to say with this is that you should not be entitled for poor coders work while your job is accomplished. If that makes any sense for you.

Tomas Smagurauskas
  • 656
  • 5
  • 16
  • That's what I thought and simply needed confirmation from one professional to another. We are running into walls because the horse is before the carriage from an organizational stand point. We have a product that will for the most part revolutionize reporting and so everyone wants a piece of the pie. Typical, many chiefs and a handful of Indians. I've written practically books on the matter holding people's hands through business, functional, technical specs, right down to coding and testing. All this, only to be hindered by politics, obfuscation and redirection. Thanks Thomas – Nanohurtz Feb 05 '13 at 00:58